|
[Sponsors] |
August 25, 2018, 15:51 |
Why does pisoFoam even exist?
|
#1 |
New Member
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 1
Rep Power: 0 |
Hi,
As far as I understand, the pisoFoam solver restricts users to maximum Courant number of approximately one, whereas pimpleFoam can get around this restriction with the use of multiple outerCorrectors. One of the MAJOR reasons why an implicit solver is preferred over an explicit one (which is much faster and easy to code) is to avoid the maximum Courant number restriction. pisoFoam, using an implicit formulation still has the restriction. So, why would someone use pisoFoam ever? Can't we get the same stuff done at a fraction of computational time using an explicit solver? |
|
Tags |
pisofoam |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Differences in solution method for pisoFoam and buoyantBoussinesqPisoFoam | mchurchf | OpenFOAM | 7 | August 6, 2023 10:12 |
How can I get stedaystate solution from pisoFoam? | mykkujinu2201 | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 1 | December 8, 2015 08:37 |
pisoFoam, pimpleFoam - Fluent user's questions | RodriguezFatz | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 0 | September 4, 2013 05:26 |
pisoFoam compiling error with OF 1.7.1 on MAC OSX | Greg Givogue | OpenFOAM Programming & Development | 3 | March 4, 2011 18:18 |
Errors running allwmake in OpenFOAM141dev with WM_COMPILE_OPTION%3ddebug | unoder | OpenFOAM Installation | 11 | January 30, 2008 21:30 |